Arctic sea ice radar freeboard retrieval from the European Remote-Sensing Satellite (ERS-2) using altimetry: toward sea ice thickness observation from 1995 to 2021

• Published in: The Cryosphere
• Main Authors: M. Bocquet, S. Fleury, F. Piras, E. Rinne, H. Sallila, F. Garnier, F. Rémy
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Copernicus Publications 2023
• Subjects: Environmental sciences; GE1-350; Geology; QE1-996.5; Arctic; Sea ice; The Cryosphere
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-3013-2023; https://doaj.org/article/b4ad1bb6ee21430c8f545af3f8f79294

Sea ice volume's significant interannual variability requires long-term series of observations to identify trends in its evolution. Despite improvements in sea ice thickness estimations from altimetry during the past few years thanks to CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2, former ESA radar altimetry missions such as the Environmental Satellite (Envisat) and especially the European Remote-Sensing Satellite (ERS-1 and ERS-2) have remained under-exploited so far. Although solutions have already been proposed to ensure continuity of measurements between CryoSat-2 and Envisat, there is no time series integrating ERS. The purpose of this study is to extend the Arctic radar freeboard time series back to 1995. The difficulty in handling ERS measurements comes from a technical issue known as the pulse blurring effect, altering the radar echoes over sea ice and the resulting surface height estimates. Here we present and apply a correction for this pulse blurring effect. To ensure consistency of the CryoSat-2, Envisat and ERS-2 time series, a multiparameter neural-network-based method to calibrate Envisat against CryoSat-2 and ERS-2 against Envisat is presented. The calibration is trained on the discrepancies observed between the altimeter measurements during the mission-overlap periods and a set of parameters characterizing the sea ice state. Monthly radar freeboards are provided with uncertainty estimations based on a Monte Carlo approach to propagate the uncertainties all along the processing chain, including the neural network. Comparisons of corrected radar freeboards during overlap periods reveal good agreement between the missions, with a mean bias of 0.30 cm and a standard deviation of 9.7 cm for Envisat and CryoSat-2 and a 0.20 cm bias and a standard deviation of 3.8 cm for ERS-2 and Envisat. The monthly corrected radar freeboards obtained from Envisat and ERS-2 are then validated by comparison with several independent datasets such as airborne, mooring, direct-measurement and other altimeter products. Except for two datasets, ...